How Much energy is too little?

At some point there is a minimum energy level required for penetration. It is part of the equation, but IMO most all typical big game hunting calibers far exceed whatever the minimum energy is as long as their minimum impact velocity is maintained. Minimum velocity is the only thing we need to track.
 
KE is really just a by-product of velocity and bullet weight. Temporary cavitation does play a role in creating hypovolemic shock, especially at rifle velocities due to tissue stretch, however is not the mechanism we rely on for putting a target down. Disregarding a CNS shot or major/massive bone damage, bullet placement and penetration to blood carrying organs is what creates hypovolmia/blood / blood pressure loss. To get that penetration we need good bullet design and construction. Higher velocities do generate more energy but bullet design, construction and weight are bigger factors in generating penetration than velocity.

Winna-Winna————Chicken dinna! memtb
 
At some point there is a minimum energy level required for penetration. It is part of the equation, but IMO most all typical big game hunting calibers far exceed whatever the minimum energy is as long as their minimum impact velocity is maintained. Minimum velocity is the only thing we need to track.
Koda,
Absolutely, you are correct. My point is that too many folks get wrapped around the axle over energy numbers. We need that velocity to get the bullet to the target and generate the needed penetration and if we achieve that, terminal energy numbers don't really matter. I do wound ballistic workshops to LE for a major ammo maker and shoot a lot of gel. I still find that many of my customers ( although they are getting fewer) think that .45acp's knock people down.
 
KE is really just a by-product of velocity and bullet weight. Temporary cavitation does play a role in creating hypovolemic shock, especially at rifle velocities due to tissue stretch, however is not the mechanism we rely on for putting a target down. Disregarding a CNS shot or major/massive bone damage, bullet placement and penetration to blood carrying organs is what creates hypovolmia/blood / blood pressure loss. To get that penetration we need good bullet design and construction. Higher velocities do generate more energy but bullet design, construction and weight are bigger factors in generating penetration than velocity.
Exactly!

1711219528980.png


You reiterated similar factors I addressed in #2.

"My" unwritten rule is 1000 FT-LBS for antelope/deer-size game and 1500 FT-LBS for elk-size game and higher than the minimum recommended bullet velocity (a critical choice) to expand at POI effectively. It has not failed me for many decades. The NUT (who is responsible for bullet choice, shot placement, etc.) behind the trigger remains the most significant factor.
 
Exactly!

View attachment 556675

You reiterated similar factors I addressed in #2.

FEENIX, I thought the OP was to debate the fallacy about the importance of ft/lbs. energy.

While kinetic energy and ft/lbs are perhaps related, the topic is ft/lbs energy….. which a the misleading term used by bullet manufacturers for many years. It gave us, the somewhat gullible, shooters a method to compare cartridges……however incorrect and useless it may be! memtb
 
This subject can be all over place and opinions equally as well. Ultimately a good vital shot will be the best starting point for anything regardless of energy. Archery does kill with a lot less energy but big rifle energy not vitally placed doesn't guarantee a recoverable animal. An animals will to live can vary as well. During the season I track a lot of deer for folks with my cur. All of them generally non vital hits and doesn't matter what caliber hit them. Gut shot with 300 win mag usually equally the same result as a 243. Deer runs a few hundred yards and lays down. This is just my experience. I've seen some deer not hit very good at all lay down like they were in their last breath and tracked some that go a mile with most their guts left at the hit site. And most deer I track are for grown men and very few kids I've tracked deer for make as bad of shots ironically. I can't tell ya how many men shot the front leg and swear they dropped him through a double lung hit just to learn the deer was hit in its knee.
 
Nebraska deer regs. requires 800 ft/lb at 100yd for rifle and 400 ft/lb at 50 yd for handguns.
Nothing is said about energy at impact.
Ranges where I am at can be really long
 
I put virtually ZERO thought into impact energy. Impact velocity sufficient to provide proper bullet upset is what I consider.

I've not seen a single bullet manufacturer say their recommended minimum energy, but they all lost minimum impact velocity.
This is because bullet deformation in a liquid like media depends on dynamic pressure so the animal is "hard enough" to expand the bullet. Basically, at a certain impact velocity, the "deer" is harder than the bullet as the material can't get our of the way fast enough and the bullet deforms. As the bullet penetrates and slows down it will stop deforming. You can impact steel plate at much lower velocity and there is plenty of energy to deform the bullet

Just saying - minimum expansion velocity alone is not an indicator of killing power any more than energy is stand alone

Lou
 
This is because bullet deformation in a liquid like media depends on dynamic pressure so the animal is "hard enough" to expand the bullet. Basically, at a certain impact velocity, the "deer" is harder than the bullet as the material can't get our of the way fast enough and the bullet deforms. As the bullet penetrates and slows down it will stop deforming. You can impact steel plate at much lower velocity and there is plenty of energy to deform the bullet

Just saying - minimum expansion velocity alone is not an indicator of killing power any more than energy is stand alone

Lou
Lou,
You are right. Expansion, if you get it, usually occurs within the first couple of inches of penetration. We see this in gel testing all the time. Modern rifle bullets are designed to have a wide range of velocities at which they will expand although expansion can vary widely according to the impact velocity. On the LE side of the house , especially in handgun bullets, expansion is not something we rely on getting 100% of the time. Variables such as the type of clothing a person is wearing or any other intermediate barriers can can affect expansion. Plugged HP's have a tendency to become FMJ's and will go completely through a 16" block of gel in all of the handgun calibers. Expansion in any bullet should never be considered a cure for poor shot placement or penetration.
I've killed some pretty large critters, very effectively, with heavy, solid rifle bullets.
 
I'd like to see a discussion on what is considered 'Enough' energy to effectively kill an Elk, Deer, Antelope...critter in general.

I've seen folks suggest that anything over 1100ft/lbs all the way to a minimum of 1500. While looking at some Pistol data, I found that a .45ACP 230gn bullet has 369 ft/lbs of energy at the muzzle. I'm willing to bet I could kill an Elk with a .45ACP at point blank, not that it'd be my preferred weapon/cartridge of choice.

So, assuming a .45 with 369 ft/lbs is adequate to kill an Elk, at point blank, why do so many people think they must have AT LEAST 1100 or 1500 ft/lbs of energy or any other arbitrary amount of energy? What is this based on? Is there any empirical data to support a specific minimum? Where do these figures originate?

LET THE OPINIONS FLY!

JK
Well I killed a whitetail doe with a 45acp 200 grain xtp out of a 1911 at 80 yards, but the bullet flight time went from nice broadside shot to a femoral artery in the rear ham! Luckily she was done in 20 yards. My avatar lion was a JM S&W 629 45 acp revolver she was dead at the hammer strike. Now an elk at 10 yards with hard cast bullets possible but why? I've shot a few elk and I personally think they deserve to be hit just as hard as the shooter can possibly stand.
 

Recent Posts

Top